Re: AW: Shouldn't this be an error?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: AW: Shouldn't this be an error? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 25152.980789445@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | AW: Shouldn't this be an error? (Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: AW: Shouldn't this be an error?
Re: AW: Shouldn't this be an error? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at> writes: >> A compromise position would be to allow dropping trailing columns only >> when the column name list is omitted. > Sounds reasonable to me. IIRC, there's some interaction between this behavior and the way that INSERT ... DEFAULT VALUES is implemented; I think DEFAULT VALUES is parsed as an empty values list and then the trailing-column-omission code is what actually makes the right things happen. So changing it without breaking DEFAULT VALUES is not entirely trivial; it'll take some changes in the raw-parsetree representation. There are other missing SQL features hereabouts also, such as being able to write a DEFAULTed column explicitly:INSERT ... VALUES('foo', DEFAULT, 42); and being able to insert multiple explicit rows:INSERT ... VALUES('foo', DEFAULT, 42), VALUES('bar', 99, 44); I think we should deal with all of these issues at once, which means it's not something to try to fix for 7.1. Bruce, would you add a TODO item? * Bring INSERT ... VALUES up to full SQL92 spec. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: